From: | Fujii Masao <fujii(dot)masao(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #4109: Typo in documentation |
Date: | 2008-04-17 04:39:38 |
Message-ID: | 4806D48A.4080409@oss.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I found the typo in
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/datatype-enum.html .
>>
>>> The length of an enum value's textual label is limited by the NAMEDATALEN
>>> setting compiled into PostgreSQL; in standard builds this means at most 63
>> bytes.
>>
>> Correct is that the NAMEDATALEN means 64 bytes in standard builds.
>
> No. NAMEDATALEN is 64 bytes, but the 64th byte is reserved for the
> null-terminator, so the string stored can be at most 63 bytes long.
Ok.
But, it's described that NAMEDATALEN is 64 bytes in
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-createtype.html.
This conflict can confuse the user. So, should we unite the
descriptions of the number of bytes for NAMEDATALEN?
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
TEL (03)5860-5115
FAX (03)5463-5490
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josep Llort | 2008-04-17 06:54:42 | BUG #4110: Error on select doing (date +1) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-16 16:46:44 | Re: BUG: Protocol 3.0: that's just odd, needing to add the number of bytes the length field occupies |